Due to the increasingly precious fuel supply, and at a time where the effects of emissions are more profoundly felt, efforts to guide traffic through a signaled intersection while the light is green are becoming increasingly attractive. Allowing vehicles to remain in the high energy state are the best way to reduce the national fuel consumption rate. A vehicle that does not have to re-accelerate from a stop will save much more fuel and emit much less pollution than those that do have to come to a complete stop and reaccelerate back up to the traveling speed.
Many inventions anticipate that there could be a “platoon” or a “convoy” or moving traffic-filled zone that approaches the traffic signal at constant velocity such that the vehicles that get in the green zone make it through the light while it is green. Examples are to be implied in Gray (U.S. Pat. No. 3,302,168), et al, 1967, Proctor (U.S. Pat. No. 3,750,099) July 1973, Yeakley (U.S. Pat. No. 872,423) March 1975, theoretically laid out by Villemain, (U.S. Pat. No. 3,529,284) September 1970.
In these references, there is no real way the traffic is formed or organized, other than the informal identification of where a green zone is. There is no coordinated effort to position the traffic somewhat in the same relative position it had been in when it approached the area before the intersection where traffic should be organized. The references show no means to consolidate or compress the traffic from a previously random constant stream of traffic into that zone of somewhat constant velocity (for that matter, of any average, or any aggregate velocity and also one that cannot exceed speed limit) that goes through during the green.
While the green zone indeed qualifies for the possibility for keeping vehicles in the high energy state, and thus saving fuel and reducing emissions, the inventions mentioned above may promote speeding. If there is a perceivable way to get into a green zone, the vehicles could easily exceed, and in some cases would have to exceed the speed limit to gain access to the green zone ahead, thereby creating a dangerous situation. In the case of Marton (U.S. Pat. No. 5,278,554 Jan. 11 1994), Raswant (U.S. Pat. No. 5,959,553 Sep. 28, 1999; U.S. Pat. No. 5,821,878 Oct. 13, 1998, U.S. Pat. No. 5,330,278 Jul. 19, 1994; U.S. Pat. No. 6,424,271 Jul. 23, 2002), management for a lane is anticipated as well as opposing (perpendicular) direction being taken into account. There is a “travel” zone” that is identified only as a green zone approaching the intersection leaving out any information for motorists in the middle of a green zone. Are they at the beginning of it? The end of it? Are they gaining, i.e. coming from the back of the pattern or “platoon” to the front? With Marton, as well as others, the traffic will build up on either end of the green zone. What is especially dangerous, is that traffic would build up and crowd in on the trailing part of a green zone where it had to exceed the speed limit in order to get there. So not only would traffic bunch up at too large of an amount too rapidly, it would also do it at a speed greater than the speed limit. An infrastructure difficulty with Villimon, Hawkes (U.S. Pat. No. 3,544,959 December 1970), Marton et al is the coordination of moving pattern of switching lights along with what may turn out as a large amount of power to run them. Also, it would be very expensive to operate. With these inventions, there is a “processor” but none of them describes the details of how traffic is safely gathered in a green phase.
For many years, the timing of traffic lights, especially on one way streets has allowed for more mobility by the traffic not having to stop. As long as vehicles knew what speed to go, they would be able to make a series of green lights. This timing and synchronization, has taken different forms and is often referred to as a “Green Wave”. Traffic travelling under this condition could provide mobility, save fuel, reduce emissions. The challenge with a Green Wave is its limited use. It works in essentially only one direction and it the signals must be appropriately oriented i.e. be multiple, fairly evenly spaced, and so on, in order for it to be applicable. A green wave would not work for first encountered traffic signals and signals that are far enough apart that they could be qualified as first encountered. It does not work for traffic going in opposite directions on the same road; i.e. bi-directional. Green Wave will also not be effective in essentially isolated signals or signals far enough apart that they could be treated as isolated. Green wave would not work for green patterns to take turns going through the green for opposing (perpendicular) directions such as E-W, and N-S for the same signal. More straightforward green wave applications would be for one way streets laid out essentially parallel to one another (i.e. N-S streets only or E-W streets only). Attempts at Green Wave going in opposite (perpendicular) directions including more complex examples are to be found in Marton 1994, Rawswant 1994, 1998, 1999, 2002 which identify a green zone in a block by block grid in a city including “checkerboard patterns and alternating bands”. While a green wave could also function in a block by block grid in a city, they work most reliably and autonomously as one way streets. Green wave attempts for opposite (perpendicular) directions that may involve block by block scenarios get more complex and may provide a diminishing return of mobility at higher complexity, less reliability, less dependability, and less safety; i.e. becoming more dangerous.
The first necessity of traffic management in getting through during the green phase for first-encountered signals is to convey some kind of instructions to the individual motorist. While Villemain, Hawkes, Marton, Raswant, et al all identify some kind of green zone, as well as “vacated area”, these inventions lack (along with a method of safely consolidating traffic) any kind of clear way instruct the traffic to go into the green zone. There is no method or parameters that they provide, and any idea that they do have is detrimental to safety in a sense that they encourage speeding to catch up with a green zone.
While green wave will not work for conditions of first encountered, or far apart encountered, my invention will work these conditions, as well as a tool that enhances green wave and approaches to green wave systems. My invention will also be able to serve as a tool that unite different systems with one another, and provide even more mobility. Using readouts as described in my invention could effectively instruct individual motorists and also work effectively as a tool for enhancing and clarifying complex inner city algorithms as discussed above.